We can't deny that we wish it was our hands wrapped tightly around the HP prototype e-book reader gorgeously pictured here. Showcased at the HP Lab University event in Lisbon, Portugal, last month, it's the same device we had already talked about back in May. Only this time the cool guys from the Spanish blog Gizmologia got the chance to shoot a video for us.

Supposedly at a later stage, it is going to have a touch screen and WiFi connectivity. Well, we'll keep our eyes (and ears) open for updates on this one.

PS: I really like how the HP reader implements the "over-forty button"

I am using a samsung q1 with 2meg of memory and running vista witha five hour battery. The new microsoft reader format running in portrait mode is very good and because the page turning virtual button is on the side rathe than at the bottom of the text, it is an easy one handed read and operation. The HP looks to me too heavy for one hand because of the catilevered weight if held only in say the left hand.

Why is the design so bad? I saw two major problems. There needs to be a button in all four corners. You can see how the user struggles to hold the device with his left and hitting the button with his right.
The page turn animation is not only annoying, but a classic user interface goof. Emulating a non-computer UI on he computer is as silly as it can get. The User Interface Hall of Shame shows this for a VOIP program which gives a classic phone as UI on the screen. This is no different.

I'm with Robert on this one. The design is horrible IMHO. I don't see many applications for seeing both pages at once, and having a page turning animation is gimmicky. I think it would be a big improvement if more companies were to focus on a single use for their device and consider usability a little more seriously.

Logically I think some page turn controls should be underneath a reader. They always put them on top so you can see them but once one knows where they are does one always look to find them? Those buttons are the ones used the most.

The reason for my wishing them underneath is that one has 4 fingers resting there, as for the top you only have the thumb. When one uses a button placed on top, depending on reader position, as soon as the thumbs is moved gripping is compromised with danger of dropping. Now if a button underneath is used, one finger can be moved without interfering with the holding grip as the 3 others continue. This bottom button could be software locked on demand. This way reading can be a one handed affair in any position as long as the device is not too heavy.

Why is the design so bad? I saw two major problems. There needs to be a button in all four corners. You can see how the user struggles to hold the device with his left and hitting the button with his right.
The page turn animation is not only annoying, but a classic user interface goof. Emulating a non-computer UI on he computer is as silly as it can get. The User Interface Hall of Shame shows this for a VOIP program which gives a classic phone as UI on the screen. This is no different.

I agree, the whole thing is a stupid crap (sorry).

Since I have a tablet PC (slate) I don't need anything else. I can use the built in joystick to turn pages or the stylus. I can look up a word in the oxford concise dictionary in just 3 seconds by moving the slider with the stylus.

Logically I think some page turn controls should be underneath a reader. They always put them on top so you can see them but once one knows where they are does one always look to find them? Those buttons are the ones used the most.

On the original CyBook the page turn buttons are on the side - that works very well. Although the new eInk readers are so thin, it might not be feasible to do that!

I do like the page turn strips of the HP. There are definitely enough of them also. Imitating paper page turns is a goof, but the control strip itself is not responsible. It seems to be a touch pad and therefore can be used for useful interactions.

The strips just make the HP larger unnecessarily. Why not have a touchscreen rather? The frame is just too wide around the screen and the focus is on the controls and the user interface rather than on the reading experience.
They can not beat the touchscreen concept there is nothing more natural than that, the strips are too much ado for nothing.

The strips just make the HP larger unnecessarily. Why not have a touchscreen rather? The frame is just too wide around the screen and the focus is on the controls and the user interface rather than on the reading experience.
They can not beat the touchscreen concept there is nothing more natural than that, the strips are too much ado for nothing.

Touch screens are appealing for navigation but I'm not certain I'd want one on a reader.

When one reads a paper book every page is fresh, unless it's been previously read by a careless person. With a reader I find myself obsessed with dust particles on the screen and constantly brushing off the surface. Eink readers having such a low contrast ratio the screen has to be kept clean because dust comes off clearer than text. I would just hate having a fingerprint smeared reading surface. And since readers need less navigation than other devices, I'd trade a touchscreen for a lower reader price.

I agree totally with the strips oversizing the device. And who says oversize says overweight!... and cumbersome.